INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Not criminally responsible due to mental disorder does not count as a previous conviction for offenses with greater punishments for repeat offenders.
SECTION WORDING
672.36 A verdict of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder is not a previous conviction for the purposes of any offence under any Act of Parliament for which a greater punishment is provided by reason of previous convictions.
EXPLANATION
Section 672.36 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an exception to the rule that prior convictions can result in stiffer punishments for subsequent offenses. Specifically, it states that a verdict of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder cannot be considered a previous conviction for the purposes of any offense under any Act of Parliament that mandates a greater punishment due to previous convictions. This provision recognizes that individuals who have been found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder are not necessarily repeat offenders. Rather, they may have committed a single offense during a period of mental illness or crisis. As such, it would be inappropriate to punish them more harshly for subsequent offenses based on their prior mental health status, as this would be punitive and discriminatory. Overall, Section 672.36 reflects Canada's commitment to ensuring that individuals with mental illness are treated fairly and equitably under the law. By exempting them from harsher punishments for subsequent offenses, the provision recognizes that these individuals may require specialized support and treatment to prevent future criminal behavior and promote their recovery and well-being.
COMMENTARY
Section 672.36 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an important safeguard for individuals who have been found not criminally responsible on account of their mental disorder. Essentially, this provision prevents their past mental health struggles from being used against them in future criminal proceedings. The provision is significant because it recognizes that mental illness is not the fault of the individual, and should not be used to increase the punishment handed down for future offenses. It is based on the principle of fairness, which is a cornerstone of the Canadian justice system. When a person is found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, they are still held responsible for their actions, but in a different way. Rather than being punished, they are sent to a psychiatric facility until they are deemed safe to return to the community. This approach recognizes that individuals with mental illness require treatment, not punishment, in order to reduce the risk of future offending. It is a more compassionate and evidence-based approach to justice that prioritizes public safety while also taking into account the needs of the individual. However, despite the legal protections provided by section 672.36, there are still stigmas surrounding mental illness that can impact how individuals are perceived and treated by society. This can include discrimination in employment, housing, and other areas of life. To address these issues, it is important for our society to continue to prioritize mental health and to work towards reducing the stigma surrounding mental illness. By doing so, we can create a more equitable and compassionate society that ensures fairness for all individuals, regardless of their mental health status. In conclusion, section 672.36 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an important safeguard for individuals who have been found not criminally responsible on account of their mental disorder. It recognizes the need for treatment, rather than punishment, in order to reduce the risk of future offending. However, we must continue to work towards reducing the stigma surrounding mental illness to ensure that individuals with mental health struggles are treated fairly in all areas of life.
STRATEGY
Section 672.36 of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines an important provision regarding verdicts of mental disorder. It stipulates that such verdicts cannot be treated as previous convictions when considering any offence for which a harsher punishment is prescribed for habitual offenders. This provision carries significant strategic considerations for lawyers, prosecutors, and judges, as it impacts sentencing and plea bargaining decisions. One important strategic consideration deals with the fact that mental health issues are often involved in cases where this provision is applicable. Defence lawyers can use an NCR verdict to protect their clients from harsher punishment due to previous convictions. Conversely, prosecutors can use a history of mental instability as a potential cause for sentencing enhancements, regardless of previous convictions. Ultimately, the legal team that can gather the most compelling evidence related to mental health will be best positioned to navigate this provision effectively. Another strategic consideration is the impact this provision has on plea bargaining. In cases where a defendant is not in a strong legal position, they may choose to accept an NCR plea in exchange for a lighter sentence. While this plea eliminates the possibility of a criminal conviction, it does not prevent the accused from being detained in a mental health facility. Prosecutors can also leverage the potential of an NCR verdict as a bargaining chip, making a plea agreement more appealing to defendants who are concerned about the impact of previous convictions on future sentencing. Some strategies that could be employed when dealing with Section 672.36 include focusing on developing an evidence-based case that clearly illustrates the role of mental health in the alleged crime. Additionally, legal teams could opt to mount a partial defence in cases where guilt has been established, but sane culpability is in question. The goal is to introduce NCR as a viable defence option and facilitate more focus on mental health issues in the trial. Finally, defense lawyers can highlight the consequences of a criminal conviction for their clients and use the potential for an NCR verdict as an attractive bargaining chip to secure a lighter sentence. Ultimately, the strategic considerations when dealing with Section 672.36 of the Criminal Code of Canada require a balanced approach that acknowledges the complexities of the legal system and the role mental health plays in criminal cases. Lawyers, prosecutors, and judges must work together to create an equitable system that ensures justice is served while protecting vulnerable individuals who require mental health support. By leveraging the provisions of the Criminal Code effectively and advocating for their clients, legal teams can navigate the complexities of the criminal justice system and attain the best possible outcomes for their clients.